Remove Automatic SSL domain

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

Annotations already declare destructive=true and idempotent=true, so the safety profile is known. The description adds genuinely new context: the required certificates:manage permission, the idempotency-key reuse rule, and the refresh-and-read recovery path on ambiguity. This goes meaningfully beyond the annotations, though it does not describe the resulting state of the subscription after removal.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Three sentences, each front-loaded with the action, then prerequisites, then recovery behavior. No filler or restated annotation content.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a destructive, permission-gated mutation with no output schema, the description covers prerequisites, authorization, approval, and ambiguous-outcome handling. It could say more about the post-removal effect on the subscription, but the operational essentials are present.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 75% and the description reinforces the meaning of domain_id (must be the exact, verified ID), certificate_subscription_id (read the subscription for it), and idempotencyKey (reuse only for an unchanged retry, not for ambiguity). This adds operational meaning beyond the raw type/pattern constraints.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

States a specific verb and resource with scope: removing one eligible purchased DNS name from an owned Automatic SSL subscription. That precision cleanly separates it from siblings like replace_automatic_ssl_domain, cancel_automatic_ssl_subscription, and the list/get Automatic SSL reads.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Explicitly prescribes the prerequisite workflow: read the subscription and list_automatic_ssl_actions to confirm eligibility and the exact domain ID, then get explicit approval. It also tells the agent what to do on an ambiguous outcome. It stops short of naming the alternative sibling (replace_automatic_ssl_domain) for the swap-vs-remove decision, so it lands at 4 rather than 5.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.